“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce

The following 3 users Like Full Circle's post:3 users Like Full Circle's postTheBeardedDude (25-11-2015), skyking (25-11-2015), Erxomai (25-11-2015)

Presents findings from 2008 to 2012 on the relationship between households that were above or below the federal poverty level and nonfatal violent victimization, including rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. This report examines the violent victimization experiences of persons living in households at various levels of poverty, focusing on type of violence, victim's race or Hispanic origin, and location of residence. It also examines the percentage of violent victimizations reported to the police by poverty level. Data are from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which collects information on nonfatal crimes, reported and not reported to the police, against persons age 12 or older from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households. During 2012, about 92,390 households and 162,940 persons were interviewed for the NCVS.

Highlights:

For the period 2008–12—
Persons in poor households at or below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) (39.8 per 1,000) had more than double the rate of violent victimization as persons in high-income households (16.9 per 1,000).

Persons in poor households had a higher rate of violence involving a firearm (3.5 per 1,000) compared to persons above the FPL (0.8–2.5 per 1,000).

The overall pattern of poor persons having the highest rates of violent victimization was consistent for both whites and blacks. However, the rate of violent victimization for Hispanics did not vary across poverty levels.

Poor Hispanics (25.3 per 1,000) had lower rates of violence compared to poor whites (46.4 per 1,000) and poor blacks (43.4 per 1,000).

Poor persons living in urban areas (43.9 per 1,000) had violent victimization rates similar to poor persons living in rural areas (38.8 per 1,000).

Poor urban blacks (51.3 per 1,000) had rates of violence similar to poor urban whites (56.4 per 1,000).

All this tells me is that poor people are victims at a higher rate than rich people. Rich people can afford gated communities, security systems, guns, etc.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet

This entire exercise has been very illuminating. I have read many papers that correlate crime to poverty, your charts however make it quite clear that all other factors are subordinate (such as race and populaton density).

The charts show the distribution of collected data and that data is what it is. Interpreting the data appears to me to be quite objective.

The only way to contradict this data would be to provide opposing data of your own (as opposed to a single person source).

How about it LDH, any studies to show that crime is solely related to skin color and is not correlated to income?

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce

“In a 2002 study by World Bank economists...it was found out that crime rates and inequality are positively correlated within countries and also between countries. The correlation is a causation – inequality induces crime rates.”

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce

This entire exercise has been very illuminating. I have read many papers that correlate crime to poverty, your charts however make it quite clear that all other factors are subordinate (such as race and populaton density).

The charts show the distribution of collected data and that data is what it is. Interpreting the data appears to me to be quite objective.

The only way to contradict this data would be to provide opposing data of your own (as opposed to a single person source).

How about it LDH, any studies to show that crime is solely related to skin color and is not correlated to income?

It makes no difference to me. To me, there is no excuse for crime. As my posts show, the top ten states for crime mostly have high populations of minorities. The ten states with the lowest crime have low populations of minorities. If poor whites are just as likely to commit crimes as poor minorities, this just means there are more poor minorities than poor whites. Liberals think minorities are poor because of racism. Conservatives think minorities are poor because they rather commit crime than work.

As I said, it makes no difference to me. My handcuffs don't discriminate. Commit a crime, go to jail. I don't give a damn if you're poor. There's food banks, government aid, shit like that. Fuckers get greedy and turn to crime for drugs and shit. I have no sympathy.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet

(25-11-2015 07:09 PM)Full Circle Wrote: This entire exercise has been very illuminating. I have read many papers that correlate crime to poverty, your charts however make it quite clear that all other factors are subordinate (such as race and populaton density).

The charts show the distribution of collected data and that data is what it is. Interpreting the data appears to me to be quite objective.

The only way to contradict this data would be to provide opposing data of your own (as opposed to a single person source).

How about it LDH, any studies to show that crime is solely related to skin color and is not correlated to income?

It makes no difference to me. To me, there is no excuse for crime. As my posts show, the top ten states for crime mostly have high populations of minorities. The ten states with the lowest crime have low populations of minorities. If poor whites are just as likely to commit crimes as poor minorities, this just means there are more poor minorities than poor whites. Liberals think minorities are poor because of racism. Conservatives think minorities are poor because they rather commit crime than work.

As I said, it makes no difference to me. My handcuffs don't discriminate. Commit a crime, go to jail. I don't give a damn if you're poor. There's food banks, government aid, shit like that. Fuckers get greedy and turn to crime for drugs and shit. I have no sympathy.

So no studies then?

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce

The following 2 users Like Full Circle's post:2 users Like Full Circle's postTurkeyBurner (25-11-2015), TheBeardedDude (25-11-2015)

In case you forgot the point being made, crime is higher when poverty is prevalent regardless of other demographics including political or racial. No one here is saying not to arrest criminals.

As for what Liberals or Conservatives think is immaterial, only what they can prove and what can be proven is that poverty and crime go hand in hand. Address poverty and crime will decrease.

"IV. Conclusions
The main conclusion of this paper is that income inequality, measured by the Gini index, has a significant and positive effect on the incidence of crime. This result is robust to changes in the crime rate when it is used as the dependent variable (whether homicide or robbery), the sample of countries and periods, alternative measures of income inequality, the set of additional variables explaining crime rates (control variables), and the method of econometric estimation. In particular, this result persists when using instrumental variable methods that take advantage of the dynamic properties of our cross- country and time-series data to control for both measurement error in crime data and the joint endogeneity of the explanatory variables.

In the process of arriving at this conclusion, we found some interesting results; the following are among them:

First, the incidence of violent crime has a high degree of inertia, which justifies early intervention to prevent crime waves.
Second, violent crime rates decrease when economic growth improves. Since violent crime is jointly determined by the pattern of income distribution and by the rate of change of national income, we can conclude that faster poverty reduction leads to a decline in national crime rates. And third, the mean level of income, the average educational attainment of the adult population, and the degree of urbanization in a country are not related to crime rates in a significant, robust, or consistent way.”

I didn’t think you’d take the time to read the paper so I’m giving you the Cliff Notes version. You’re welcome.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce